Full Judgment
Pramod Kumar Jain versus State of M.P.& ORS.Writ Petition No ::
2053. ”
19. 06.2013.
Petitioner in person.
Shri Rahul Jain, learned Dy.
Advocate General for respondent/State.
Shri Brijesh Choubey, learned counsel for respondent No.4.
Shri Satyendra Jyotishi, learned counsel for respondent No.5.
Petitioner has filed this writ petition aggrieved by the order passed by respondents refusing to grant exemption from payment of tuition fees in the matter of education of petitioner's daughter, namely Ku.
Nayansi Jain.
Petitioner claims to be a resident of district Panna and working in the establishment of the State Government.
It is stated that petitioner and his wife have adopted the Parivar Kalyan Yojya formulated by the State Government and have undergone the sterilization operation and are, therefore, green card holders in accordance to the policy of the state Government.
Documents in support thereof are filed as Annexure P-1 and P-2.
Petitioner's daughter participated in the Pre-Engineering-Test conducted for admission to the Engineering Colleges in the year 2009.
2 She participated in the counseling held in Rewa Engineering College and was given admission in the University Institute of Technology, Barkatullah University, Bhopal.
Being a green card holder, petitioner sought exemption from payment of tuition fees with regard to his daughter.
When the same was not allowed, petitioner approached this Court and the matter was finally decided by a Division Bench of this Court on 30.6.2011 in W.A.No.149/2011.
The Division Bench directed the State Government to reexamine the claim of petitioner and pass appropriate ordeRs.The claim having been rejected vide order impugned petitioner is again before this Court.
Petitioner appearing in person argued that the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of exemption from payment of tuition fees, as the petitioners daughter is studying in a self financing autonomous institute functioning under Barkatullah University and, therefore, it has to be treated to be an institute, which is entitled to be granted the benefit of exemption from tuition fees to green card holder.
It is argued by him that the respondents are denying the said benefit to the petitioner only on the ground that certain financing autonomous institute like the institute of Engineering, Barkatullah University doesnot come 3 within the purview of circulars issued by the State Government.
Respondents have filed their reply and it is pointed out by the respondents that the petitioner's child is studying in a self financing autonomous institute to which the circulars of the State Government is not applicable.
They refer to the orders passed by the State Government on 17.10.2007 and 3.7.2009 and the decision of the cabinet to say that the policy is not applicable to autonomous engineering institute.
Referring to the return filed under similar circumstances in W.P.No.4630/2012 filed as Annexure R-1 and the circulars dated 13.5.2003 and 3.7.2009 placed thereof it is the case of State Government that as per policy of the State Government the benefit of exemption from tuition fees is applicable only in respect of medical colleges, both government and autonomous, government engineering colleges, government polytechnic colleges and government ITI's.
It is stated that self financing institute, running under aegis of university, are not entitled to the said benefit.
We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
From the documents Annexure R-1 and R-2 filed by the State Government along with return it is 4 clear that the policy of the State Government for granting exemption from payment of tuition fees was formulated and on 17.10.2007 it has been clarified vide Annexure R-1 and again on 13.5.2003 and 3.7.2009 (Annexure R-2) and in para 4 of the said circular Annexure R-2 dated 3.7.2009 the decision taken by the Government reads as under : “ 4@ fpfdRlk egkfo|ky; ¼'kkldh; Lo'kklh½].'kkldh; vfHk;kaf=dh egkfo|ky;ksa].'kkldh; ikWyhVsDuhd].'kkldh; vkS|ksfxd izf'k{k.k laLFkkvksa esa fnukad 13@05@2003 ds iwoZ ulcanh djkus okys leLr xzhu dk MZ /kkjdksa rFkk fnukad 13@05@2003 ds ckn ulcanh djkus okys dsoy xjhch js[kk ds uhps thou ;kiu djus okys xzhu dk MZ /kkjdksa dh larkuksa dks dsoy ,d gh fMxzh @ikB;dze gSr.f'k{k.k 'kqYd esa NwV dh ik=rk gksxhA vko';d gksus ij bu laLFkkvksa dks vuqnku lacaf/kr iz'kkldh; foHkkx }kjk fn;k tk;sxkA ”.
From the aforesaid it is clear that the exemption from payment of tuition fees is applicable only to medical colleges both government and autonomous, government engineering colleges, government polytechnic colleges and government Industrial Training Institutes.
There is nothing in this circular to show that a self financing autonomous engineering institute is also governed by the said circular.
The petitioner has not brought to the notice of this court any circular or document to the contrary, if the petitioner feels that there is discrimination in the matter of treating Self Financing Engineering Autonomous Institute and in 5 comparison to medical institute or if the petitioner feels that autonomous engineering institute working under the self financing scheme are being treated differently in the matter of granting benefit and the benefit which is granted to medical institutes are not being extended to him, the petitioner is required to challenge the said policy decision of the State Government as discriminatory or violative of Article 14 of the constitution, no such challenge is made in this writ petition.
Once a policy decision is taken by the State Government and the policy decision as is indicated hereinabove goes to show that the benefit and exemption from payment of tuition fees in the matter of engineering education is only applicable to government institute and it is not made applicable to self financing or autonomous institute, we are not in a position to grant any benefit to the petitioner contrary to the policy of the government.
Even though learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon an order Annexure P-15 passed by Division Bench of this Court in W.P.No.8360/2009 to show that the petitioner is also entitled to said benefit, but on a perusal of aforesaid order it is seen that the said case has been decided on the facts and circumstances that were brought on record.
In the said case the circulars and policy, as contained in government communication Annexure R-2 dated 3.7.2009 6 and the cabinet decision referred to therein have not been taken note of or considered.
The said case have been decided on the basis of the material that were available in the said case and it cannot be made applicable in the present case.
In the said case the question of applicability of the circulars to self financing autonomous institute have not been considered or decided on the contrary the said case pertains to a government engineering college and not a self financing institute like the present one.
Accordingly, we find no reason to interfere into matter, the petition is dismissed.
(RAJENDRA MENON) (A.K.SHARMA) JUDGE JUDGE ss/-